NARENDER SINGH, JEWAR V. ITO, NOIDA

ITA 1032/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Narender Singh, the appellant, who contested an addition of Rs. 591,900 made by the Assessing Officer to his income for the assessment year 2010-11. The addition was based on the assumption that Narender Singh had sold an immovable property for Rs. 10,00,000, whereas he claimed it was a gift from his grandfather and no actual transaction of money occurred. The initial assessment was made without representation from Narender Singh, leading to an unfavorable decision which was upheld by the CIT(Appeals). The Tribunal found that the matter required further verification of facts and evidence, leading to the decision to set aside the previous order and remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 112756 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-07-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Gift; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

1 ITA no. 1032/Del/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1032/DEL/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Narender Singh, Vill. Faleda Banger, Jewar, Distt. G.B. Nagar (U.P) PAN- HYXPS4641K Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Noida. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Shri Pawan Kumar Sharma, CA Department represented by: Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. DR Date of hearing 07.12.2022 Date of pronouncement 07.12.2022 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 07.04.2022, pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. That the learned assessing officer has erred in law and on the facts of the case, by making an addition of Rs. 591,900 on the account of Shri. Narender Singh prepared a sale deed by his own Late Grand Father . In this deed consideration of Rs. 500000 shown only for legal compliances . In actual there are no transaction of money due to ancestral property. 2. It is axiomatic that the order passed by the learned assessing officer is against the principle of natural justice and caused undue hardship to the assessee because in the deed the consideration is written only to do legal 2 ITA no. 1032/Del/2022 compliance and in actuality, no consideration existed for transfer of this property, Appellant is almost illiterate and did not know the procedure to get his share and wrongly Transfer deed was entered instead of will. Further appellant submitted all relevant documents to learned income tax officer but he has ignored then and make the addition of the same which is wrong in law and fact. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add or alter any or all grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that in this case the Assessing Officer was having information regarding purchase of immovable property for Rs. 10,00,000/-. Thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Before the Assessing Officer there was no representation on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 5,91,900/-. Aggrieved against this the assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals), who also sustained the addition. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is an illiterate person. The immovable property was gifted by the grandfather. No consideration was paid. However, inadvertently under the wrong advice sale consideration was mentioned in the transfer deed. He contended that the land was agricultural land and was transferred by the grandfather. He contended that witnesses have also given affidavit. Therefore, the entire transaction was based upon incorrect legal advice. 4. On the contrary, learned DR opposed the submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. I have heard rival contentions and perused the material available on record. It is seen from the record that before the Assessing Officer there was no 3 ITA no. 1032/Del/2022 representation. The assessee has also filed certain evidences in support of his claim that transaction was not a sale transaction but it was a gift transaction. All these facts need verification. Therefore, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to make a de novo assessment after considering the evidences filed by the assessee. Grounds raised in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on during the course of hearing on 07.12.2022. Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI